Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Tripura · body

2025 DAILYLAW 584 (TRI)

Abdul Ahad v. The State of Tripura

AB/19/2025 · 2025-03-17

Arindam Lodh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA A.B. 19/2025 Abdul Ahad ----Applicant(s) Versus The State of Tripura ----Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. P. Biswas, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. R. Saha, Addl. PP HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH Order 17/03/2025 Heard Mr. P. Biswas, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. R. Saha, learned Additional PP appearing for respondent-State. This is an application filed under section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant in connection with Irani PS case No. 76 of 2024, registered under Sections 325(4)/324(4)/326(g), 190, 191(3) of the BNS, 2023. As per the prosecution story, one Giashuddin lodged written complaint with the Officer-in-Charge of Irani police station alleging inter alia that some unknown miscreants had illegally trespassed into Jubarajnagar Jama Masjid and set fire in the carpet inside the masjid with intent to create tension. Mr. Biswas, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, has submitted that the applicant is not FIR named accused and he is seriously apprehending his arrest since the police officials had raided his houses time and again. It is further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated with the instant case and he has no relation with the agitation of destroying the mosque. Mr. Biswas, learned counsel also has submitted that the applicant is totally innocent. Learned counsel has further submitted that the other accused persons involved with the alleged incident were enlarged on bail by this Hon’ble Court. Mr. Saha, learned Additional PP has produced the case diary and vehemently opposed the bail prayer. I have perused the case diary. From the case diary, it is revealed that none has stated that the petitioner had attacked the Jama Masjid or involved with any agitation. Further, there is no direct evidence against the applicant. Considering the matter in its entirety, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Abdul Ahad. Accordingly, it is ordered that, in the event of arrest, the applicant, namely, Abdul Ahad, may be released on bail on executing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. However, the applicant shall appear before the Officer- in-Charge of the concerned PS as and when called for and shall co-operate with the process of investigation. With the above observations and directions, the instant bail application stands allowed and thus disposed. Return back the case diary. JUDGE SAIKAT KAR Digitally signed by SAIKAT KAR Date: 2025.03.17 13:06:20 +05'30'